Chapter 6: Opinions of Various Experts, Critics and Commentators on Cold Fusion

[ N.B: This article is a short abstract of the Ebook: "Cold Fusion Conspiracies" : if you own a website related to Cold fusion/Lenr and you want a full copy to redistribute to your visitors, please write to ebook[at]coldfusion3.com . Thank you ]

These days everybody has a way to broadcast their opinions, especially with the internet being such a massive platform that can be harnessed by anyone with a computer and an internet connection. In this way we are bombarded with a sea of ideas and viewpoints from which to draw information on news stories and topics of interest. This has certainly been the case for cold fusion, and a simple internet search will present us with many articles on the topic, whether they are critical pieces or reports on breakthroughs in the field. In this chapter we will look at what several people are saying about cold fusion, and there are certainly a broad range of characters out there who are writing about it.

An article published on scienceblogs.com titled, “Cold Fusion: Is it possible? Is it real?” by Ethan Siegel uses the quote mentioned in a previous chapter from David Goodstein, where he talks about there being no communication between cold fusion and respectable science, and that those working on cold fusion see themselves as a community under siege. The entire piece can be read here:

Siegal draws an interesting picture by taking the reader back to the year 1770 and telling the story of the first ever chess playing automaton invented by Wolfgang von Kempelen and named the “Turk”. This machine was able to beat the world’s top chess players at the time, something we saw mirrored today with the earlier mention of computer software that can beat any player at chess. But this invention had been created two centuries before the computer. At the time, Siegel goes on to tell us, von Kempelen’s machine was thought to be a huge hoax. As it turned out, many years later it was discovered that the invention was not an automaton but a machine being operated by human inside of it, pictures of the original can be seen in Siegel’s article.

The writer leaves the story of the Turk for a moment to go on to discuss the current need for a cheap, clean and safe energy source, with nuclear fusion being the perfect solution. Siegel explains the various ways in which we can recreate a reaction that takes place deep in the earth’s core in laboratories, some of which have been discussed here earlier. Siegel then talks about how Fleischmann and Pons discovered cold fusion in 1989 but were subsequently disproven, he also draws attention to the recent invention of Rossi and Focardi. Unfortunately, Siegel seems to be slowly drawing a parallel between Rossi’s current success and that of von Kempelen back in the 1700’s. In essence, that Rossi’s e-catalyzer is a fraud just like the chess playing automaton. Siegel gives a few reasons for his opinion, some of which mirror those discussed earlier, others include the fact that Rossi had claimed in the 1980’s that he could turn garbage into oil with his Petroldragon invention, which then went on to be seen as a scam, also is the fact that Rossi has been so secretive about his device. All of these are reasons for not believing in Rossi’s invention are absolutely validated, however, that does not mean that we should take them as incontrovertible proof that he is a fraud. There is surely still much more to come in this story and it might very well be the real deal or a fake – nobody yet knows.

Siegel states that he would love for Rossi’s invention to be real, but that all of the evidence points toward the opposite and this is a fair opinion to have. In his final statement he tells us that he believes cold fusion is possible, but that he has yet to be shown any fully explained scientific evidence to say that it is real. In Siegel’s opinion Fleischmann and Pons were not intentionally lying but that they just weren’t very good scientists, while he feels that Rossi is simply a con man.

Another good article can be found in Infinite Energy magazine titled, “Cold Fusion: From Reasons to Doubt to Reasons to Believe” by Dr Edmund Storms of the Los Alamos National Laboratory, now a retiree. The full article can be found at the following link: http://www.infinite-energy.com/iemagazine/issue1/reatodou.html

This article is slightly dated having been published back in the mid-nineties, however it gives us a view of one expert’s opinion on the matter in relation to the work of Fleischmann and Pons rather than that of Rossi, which is so prevalent in the media of today. Storms was writing this article six years after the big announcement about cold fusion in 1989. The writer tells how experiments have been conducted that have found proof for cold fusion but that the current problem is psychological rather than scientific. Something we discussed in the last chapter, in the way that scepticism and nihilism hold cold fusion back from progressing to the next level. Storms goes on to explain to us what exactly cold fusion is, why it is possible, and the evidence there is to back it up.

At the end of his article Storms details the interest that cold fusion has generated. Here he talks about the international conferences that are held each year, as well as the literature which had amounted to 1300 publications at the time, but has now grown even larger. In this Storm states that such a large amount of written work must mean that there is far more information discovered about cold fusion than what the sceptics are aware of. This can be related back to what was discussed in the last chapter, where certain critics were spreading their views while they had no evidence to substantiate their claims. But Storms also asks whether or not cold fusion can be replicated to function at industrial levels. If Rossi is legitimate then we can now say that it can be done, since the scientist claimed to have used his device to heat a factory for two years.

Storms ends his piece with a very positive statement, when he tells that it is very wasteful to simply write cold fusion off as “pathological science”, and that this way of thinking does not contribute anything towards discovering the truth of things. Storms proclaims, “Which viewpoint do you consider the worse sin: perhaps wasting some time and money understanding a phenomenon that later turns out to be trivial, or preventing the study of a phenomenon that later turns out to be important? A climate emphasising caution and fear of failure does not bode well for our future efforts to discover and develop new gifts of nature.” (Storms, Infinite Energy, 1995) Undeniably, this is an intelligent and progressive viewpoint to take on the matter of cold fusion.

To return to the present, one particular opinion on Rossi’s e-cat device is held by the Chief NASA Scientist, Dennis Bushnell. Bushnell supports Rossi’s invention; however he does not believe that it functions through nuclear fusion but that it is more likely to be beta decay in keeping with the Widom Larson Theory, which is where an electron and a neutron combine to create slow neutrons and neutrino in a fluctuating electric field. A video explaining the theory can be found by visiting this link:

As well as working at the NASA Langley Research Center in Virginia, Bushnell is also an author, government consultant, and an inventor himself. In Bushnell’s opinion, Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR) are the most promising form of alternative energy currently being developed, and he feels that this could solve all of our energy problems, a viewpoint taken by many scientists all over the world. This coming from a respectable mainstream scientist is great news for cold fusion, as it remained hidden in the background for years, being rejected as a hopeless dream. This could also encourage others like Bushnell to begin to speak out in support of cold fusion too. Unlike in Siegel’s article discussed previously, Bushnell is highly positive about Rossi’s E-Cat. In the article published on the Pure Energy Systems website, Bushnell is quoted as saying, “I think we are almost over the “we do not understand it” problem. I think we are almost over the “this does not produce anything useful” problem. I think this will go forward fairly rapidly now. If it does, this is capable of, by itself, completely changing geo-economics, geo-politics, and solving climate issues.” (Hank Mills, Pure Energy Systems)

If what Bushnell is saying is true, and that there really has been a turnaround in the way people are thinking about cold fusion, then it seems that the production and commercialisation of this energy source might not as far into the future as we thought. The only problem with Bushnell’s positivity is that he doesn’t think that the experiments in cold fusion were actually producing nuclear fusion, but that they were producing energy via the Widom Larson theory, which involves beta decay rather than fusion. Beta decay can be described as a kind of radioactive decay where a beta particle is emitted from an atom, and this is the energy production Bushnell is referring to.

Hank Mills, author of the article on Bushnell, ventures to try and explain the reasons for Bushnell’s conclusions on the Widom Larson Theory. Mills puts forth the idea that Widom Larson is in fact a kind of nuclear fusion, but that it uses fancier names for exotic sub atomic particles. Mills gives the following events that take place in Widom Larson as reason for his theory. One, a mini-hydrogen atom, virtual neutron, or a proton shielded by an electron, sneak past the Coulomb barrier of another atom. Two, a transmutation into a heavier element is able to occur, and three, a big release of energy occurs. Mills feels that this describes a fusion reaction but that some still prefer to argue it is not, their reason being that nuclear fusion proper can only happen when a proton is pushed through the Coulomb barrier and the full repulsion is felt.

Mills goes on to tell us how those in opposition think that if a scientist discovers a way to get a nuclei or proton to sneak into another atom then it is cheating and cannot be claimed to be nuclear fusion. Quite rightly, Mill argues for the absurdity of this statement, asking “did you climb a wall if you used a ladder?”, and that those in support of Widom Larson would only consider you to have climbed a wall if you actually did it by your own hand. In essence, they do not condone the use of shortcuts or techniques to get things done quicker.

Mills states that the most probable reason for Bushnell and others like him using Widom Larson as a way of explaining LENR is due to the continuing stigma and negativity around the term “cold fusion”. He feels that the legacy of suppression still holds onto cold fusion despite the appearance of progression. In using Widom Larson these scientists can’t be bunched in with those who support cold fusion because they have their own new and unique theory about it. An interesting interview with Andrea Rossi in relation to Widom Larson and his invention can also be found at the end of Mills’ lengthy article, the questions and answers are printed in red and black font.

On the Forbes website an article written by technology expert Mark Gibbs titled, “Believing in Cold Fusion and the E-Cat” provides us with another point of view on the subject. The article in full can be found by visiting this link:

Gibbs is coming from the point of view where he hopes the E-Cat turns out to be legitimate but he won’t be completely convinced until proper scientific proof is given to show that it works. However, Gibbs does relate to the naysayers, for he asks, how can Rossi’s invention work when it goes against the laws of science? Be that as it may, Gibbs also speaks against those who completely write Rossi off as a fake without any proof as evidence. Gibbs tells us that this point of view is a mistake, but he feels that those who believe absolutely in Rossi are wrong too. Because this group are also taking a side where they haven’t been given substantial evidence that the E-Cat works, yet they continue to believe that it does without asking any questions.

Furthermore, Gibbs identifies another group of believers whom he dubs the “Suppresists”, and these are people who come from the suppression of technology point of view, as outlined in chapter four. Gibbs describes these people as those convinced there is a conspiracy by commercial groups and the government to stop new inventions that will upset the economy from being developed and distributed. Similar to both the other camps, this group does not have absolute proof that suppression is going on, but they do have various pieces of evidence to say that it is happening, though it cannot be properly proved.

Gibbs identifies one final group which he calls the “It has already been solved” lobby. These are people who claim that a new energy source has already been discovered by either a company or an inventor. Gibbs claims that these groups have sent him to the websites of little known companies where video presentations of how their energy inventions work are shown. The writer says that the fact that there is never anywhere on the site where you can actually buy the product indicates that it is most likely not a legitimate invention. In following, Gibbs asks why Rossi has been so secretive about his device all this time, and why has he not allowed a third party to perform a test on it? Gibbs provides two possible explanations. The first is that Rossi is honestly mistaken and that he believes wholeheartedly that his machine works when it really doesn’t. However, Gibbs mentions that fact that Rossi has been working with the previously mentioned Sergio Focardi, a professor of Bologna University, and that a mistake is not likely with such a highly educated professional working on the project. This kind of mistake would also bring a large amount of criticism down both on the university and on the scientists.

The second explanation given by Gibbs, which we have discussed already, is that it is a possible fake and Rossi knows this and therefore would not take the chance of allowing a third party to test his invention. Gibbs argues that this is not very likely since there would not be a very large sum of money to gain from pulling off the fraud, and even if he did receive money for his device, once it was discovered as a fake whatever company that was involved would surely take legal action. Gibbs concludes that both scenarios are unlikely to be the case since both would end in those involved being discredited with their entire careers in ruins.

Gibbs provides further confusing evidence about Rossi for he declares that if Rossi does have a workable cold fusion device then it would be the most sought after and valuable invention in the world. Yet Gibbs points out that there have been reports of Rossi selling his home to fund the development of his invention. The writer states that this should not be a necessary step for Rossi as he could simply show any number of investors how his invention works and in turn receive an endless supply of development money for it. This conclusion only furthers our confusion over Rossi’s intentions and what he actually wants to do with his E-Cat. Certainly it is frustrating when commentators like Gibbs and many others leave us without a definable conclusion on whether Rossi is a fraud or the real thing. One might conclude that he simply isn’t in it for the money and wants to ensure a limitless supply of energy for the world without a thought for lining his own pockets. This however, like so many of the theories about him, is also highly unlikely.

Here we have seen just a small portrayal of the opinions of critics, commentators and experts on cold fusion and its potential for changing our future. There is so much out there written on the topic that it would be impossible to encapsulate all of the points of view in just one chapter. Should you wish to carry out further reading on a range of articles relating to cold fusion you will find a good selection by clicking on the following link: http://www.sciencefrontiers.com/online/search.cgi?zoom_query=fusion&zoom_per_page=50&zoom_and=1&zoom_sort=0 . Here you will find a database containing various news articles on cold fusion, so you will be able to read all of the most up to date material on the subject.

[ N.B: This article is a short abstract of the Ebook: "Cold Fusion Conspiracies" : if you own a website related to Cold fusion/Lenr and you want a full copy to redistribute to your visitors, please write to ebook[at]coldfusion3.com . Thank you ]

One Response to Cold Fusion Conspiracy Ebook – Chapter 6: Opinions of Various Experts, Critics and Commentators on Cold Fusion